RE: ooS(D( 1, ulrk
case number and name)
12 S01
Address/ Location of Subject Property2501 Cutis Ave Redodno Beach, Ca 90278 if applicable)
Decision- making body that made the decision which is the subject of the appeal:
Planning Commission
D Harbor Commission
X Preservation Commission
D Planning Director
Board of Appeals/ Uniform Code
Date of decision: 07/ 06/ 2022 Appealing: n Approval Denial Name of Appellant Charles Spence
type or print)
Address of Appellant 1940 Magnolia Ave Long Beach, Ca 90806 Telephone Number of Appellant 5062} 713-2891
Email AddressofAp pellannttcchara/rieeess,_„-
sppe nce@yahoo. com
Signature
For office use only:
APPeal Fee Paid $ Date Received by
Notice to: City Council City Manager _ City Attorney _ Planning Department _ Harbor Department
Other
RETURN TO:
Office of the City Clerk
415 Diamond Street
Redondo Beach, CA 90277
310) 318- 0656
This appeal is made pursuant to the following Redondo Beach Municipal Code Section(s) see page 3 for a partial listing of City's municipal code appeal provisions):
RBMC & 10- 4. 601 Cenificate of Appropriateness by the Preservation Commission Ground(s) for Aooeal
Pleases eci the grounds for this appeal. Where an approval /denial involves multiple entitlements/actions, please specify which entitlements/actions are contested in this appeal ( e. g. Conditional Use Permit) and the specific grounds for contesting each entitlementlaction.
Appellant is responsible for reviewing and complying with the relevant appeal procedures contained in the City's municipal code or state law, which may contain additional substantive and/or procedural requirements depending upon the nature of the appeal. It may be necessary for appellant to supplement this form with additional pages/ information to fulfill these requirements. Issues not raised here will not be considered by City Council.
See Attaced 4 pages which specify the grounds for this appeal Also ncluded GPA Historical Resource Evaluatinon Report 25 pages plus appendix
The following list provides a brief overview of some of the City' s Municipal Code Appeals (to City Council) by topic area. This is not intended to be an exhaustive list. Potential appellants are advised to review the Municipal Code Sections to determine applicability of these sections and for additional appeal procedures and appeal content requirements.
For example, California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Appeal Procedures are contained within Redondo Beach Municipal Code, Title 10, Chapter 3, Section 10- 3. 901. CEQA Appeals ( 1) must be filed within ten [ 10] days of the decision-making body's action and contain specific information described in 10- 3. 901, ( 2) require the appellant to notify the project applicant of the appeal within ten [ 10] days of the City' s action by certified mail ( and provide the Citya copy of the mail receipt), ( 3) require appellants to file any additional documentation ( such as presentations) with the City Clerk no later than seven [ 7] days before the public hearing, and ( 4) require appellant to mail a copy of any additional documentation ( such as presentations) to the applicant no later than seven [ 7] days before the public hearing by certified mail ( and provide the City a copy of the mail receipt at the public hearing).
Redondo Beach Municipal Code Section General Topic Area for Appeal RBMC 3- 14. 04 Encroachment permits
RBMC 3- 7. 1906 Temporary Street Closure
RBMC 4- 11. 146 Oil Wells -Notices to Comply
RBMC § 4- 15. 07 Registration of Canvassers, Solicitors, itinerant Merchants, Salesmen, and Peddlers
RBMC 4- 17. 12 Amusement and Entertainment Permits
RBMC § 4- 18. 11 Removal of Abandoned, Wrecked, Dismantled, or Inoperative Vehicles from Private or Public Property
RBMC § 4-26.09 Bingo Games for Charitable purposes -Appeals of revocations to the Council
RBMC 5-2,206 Weeds Rubbish, and Stagnant Water
RBMC B- 2. 10 Uniform Transient Occupancy Tax
RBMC 10- 1, 506 Subdivisions
RBMC 610- 7. 906 a 10- 1. 1011 Subdivisions
RBMC 10- 2.2500 Administrative Design Review
RBMC 10- 2.2502 Planning Commission Design Review
RBMC 10- 2.2504 Zoning Amendments
RBMC 10- 2.2505 General Plan and Specific Plan amendments RBMC 10- 2.2506 Conditional Use Permits
RBMC 10- 2. 2507 Administrative Use Permits
RBMC 10- 2. 25081 Modifications
RBMC 10- 2. 2510 Variances
RBMC 10- 2. 2514 Planned Development Review
RBMC 4 10- 2. 2520 Temporary Use Permits
RBMC 10- 3. 901 California Environmental Quality Act
RBMC 104. 601 Certificate of Appropriateness b the Preservation Commission RBMC 10- 5. 2500 Administrative Design Review Coastal Zone RBMC 10- 5. 2502 Planning Commission Design Review Coastal Zone RBMC 10-5 2504(f) Zoning Amendments Coastal Zone
RBMC 10- 5. 2505 General Plan and specific Plan amendments Coastal Zone RBMC 10- 52506 Conditional Use Permits Coastal Zone
RBMC q 10- 5. 2507 Administrative Use Permits Coastal Zone RBMC 4 10- 5. 25081 Modifications Coastal Zone
RBMC § 10- 5.2510 Variances Coastal Zane
RBMC § 10- 5.2514 Planned Development Review Coastal Zone RBMC § 10- 5.2520 Temporary Use Permits Coastal Zone
RBMC § 10- 5.2222 Coastal Development Permit
RBMC § 11- 2. 10 d Public Utilities
RBMC § 11- 3,608( b) Cable TV -Liquidated damages
RBMC § 14.01 General Appeal Procedures' only applicable if there are no specific aeat procedures movided for the challenged action.
RBMC § 2- 9.712 General Appeal Procedures [ Harbor Commissionl' only applicable if there are no specific appeal procedures provided for the challenged action.
Grounds) for Appeal:
The following is the City of RB Historic ordinance section 10- 4.201 , 10- 4. 404. and 10- 4. 311. will be referenced in the following reasons we are requesting an appeal.
Chapter 4 Historic Resources Preservation
10- 4. 201 Designation criteria.
For the purposes of this chapter, an historic resource may be designated a landmark and an area may be designated an historic district pursuant to Article 3 of this chapter, if it meets one or more of the following criteria:
a) It exemplifies or reflects special elements of the City' s cultural, social, economic, political, aesthetic, engineering, or architectural history; or b) It is identified with persons or events significant in local, state or national history; or c) It embodies distinctive characteristics of a style, type, period, or method of construction, or is a valuable example of the use of indigenous materials or craftsmanship; or d) It is representative of the notable work of a builder, designer, or architect; or 10- 4.404 Certificate of appropriateness for removal or demolition. b. The denial of the proposed work will impose an immediate and substantial hardship on the applicant because of condition peculiar to the particular improvement; and
C. The property cannot be put to a reasonable use or the owner cannot obtain a reasonable economic return therefrom without approval of the proposed work. 10- 4.311 Removal of a property from the potential historic resource list.
The property owner of a property identified by the City as a potential historic resource may request that the property be removed from the list if he or she provides specific written and verifiable documentation refuting that the property meets the criteria for designation as a landmark as described herein. An example would be that documentation is discovered that an unknown architect designed a property that was thought to have been designed by a famous architect, or the structure has been altered to an extent that the historic integrity has been lost.
The Commission shall review the request for removal following the same procedures identified in Sections 10- 4.306, 10- 4.308 and 10- 4. 309 here in I was told I would need to hire a Historical Preservationist to perform a Historical Resource Evaluation to file Certificate ofAppropriateness for removal of 2501 Curtis house form Redondo Beach potential historic list. I was provided a list ofpreservationist consultants by Stacey Kinsella Associate Planner. I chose GPA Consulting from that list.
GPA did a comprehensive analysis to determine if the house meets the standard of historical significant resource. And as directed, GPA consultant was available to answer the commission questions. However, the historical commission asked no questions pertaining to GPA' s report.
One can only conclude that GPA' s findings were not considered and the requirement of hiring a Historical Preservationist is just procedural.
The commission used the vague language of the ordnance to fulfill their personal views and personal objectives. They completely ignored GPA' s research, This became undeniable when Stacey interjected that we are not experts they GPS are experts that they are architect historians and that they probably look at big projects like the Lummis House or the Gabriel' s House, but we are here to serve Redonda Beach and do what is best for Redondo Beach and its interesting people. This caused Commissioner Caldwell to respond that' s a good point we need that community thought. After these two comments, roll call was called and the vote finished the meeting. Stacey' s comment clearly prejudiced the vote and rendered GPA' s credentials irrelevant and findings worthless.
GPA Consulting findings clearly explain in detail why none of the required criteria ( 10- 4.201) have been meet to allow designating the house as a historical resource and that no historical significant persons are associated with the house. However the commission relies solely on Stacey Kinsella findings and their own feelings and personal interpenetration and agenda to make their decision. The commission completely disregard City of RB Historic ordinance 10-
4. 201 to come to their conclusion without discussing GPA' s findings.
Pertaining to section 10- 4. 404
a) It exemplifies or reflects special elements of the City' s cultural, social, economic, political, aesthetic, engineering, or architectural history; or Pertaining to section 10- 4.404
b) It is identified with persons or events significant in local, state or national history; or The commission did not directly mention section ( a) However, GPA' s has detailed why ( a) 2501 Curtis does not exemplifies or reflects these special elements.
Section ( b) was brought up multiple times by the commission Commissioner Matsumo interpretation seems to contradicts any reasonable persons interpretation when he says that the owner builder ofthe house was referenced in the Los Angeles Times at least twice and that this implies the person is historical sign cant. Matsumo tried to present the article but was not able to locate the newspaper article that he referenced, but this did not deter him. Also Stacey in her assessment says an early occupant had church meetings at the house and used this to claim that this person is historical significant. GPS' s report clearly explains why these church meetings do not rise to the level of significance. Stacey also states that another early occupant was one of the first female engineers in the area. None of these people referenced can be shown to be significant. GPA' s analysis explains why these residents are not significant. Perhaps interesting but interesting does not rise to the level of historical significant.
Pertaining to section 10- 4. 404 Certificate of appropriateness for removal or demolition.
Substantial hardship related to the house physical condition and house location was basically deemed irrelevant. Commissioner Matsumu stated, " It's not our business to go into financial situation" and Commissioner McNearbey Stated " sell as is." These statements are indirect contradiction to section 10- 4- 404 Reasonable economic return is not possible due to condition related to age ( asset depletion) and location on lot unfortunately the house sits center of two lots.
Pertaining to section 10- 4. 311 Removal of a property from the potential historic resource list
GPA' s report as required thoroughly explains and provides specific written and verifiable documentation refuting that the property meets the criteria for designation as a landmark. GPA' s finds the house lacks the most defining characteristics of a Craftsman home. Craftsman homes are known for open porches and a low- pitched gable roofthis house lacks these features. This house was built in 1933 outside the dates accepted as Craftsman Arts and Crafts period 1900- 1920. Again, the commission chose to ignore GPA' s findings. Stacey claims the house represents a good early example of a Craftsman House. Commissioner Matsumu says the house has a certain method of construction but failed to be specific. Instead he just takes his wording directly from the ordinance. Commissioner Jackson says ` 9 want to save all these houses." ' Then he placed his focus on alternatives to demolishing. He suggested moving the house where it would not be in the center or the lot or placing accessory dwelling units on the lot. None of these suggesting' s are viable options are cost prohibitive and have nothing to do with section 10- 4. 311 requesting removal form the potential historical resource list.
The house has been listed for sale with no offers or serious interest. The house is obsolete uneconomic to rent has unfinished stone siding. The location of house is problematic sittings on center of two lots. This house is a blighted impediment to redevelopment and is a severe economic hardship.
For all the reasons listed and all the reasons detailed in GPA' s report which meet the criteria for not listing the house as a historical resource we are appealing the historical board decision and request the house be removed from the historical resource list. 2501 Curtis Avenue
Historical Resource Evaluation Report
Prepared by:
N,
A
April 4, 2022
G !? A
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. INTRODUCTION............................................................................... 1
1. 1 Purpose............................................................................................... 1
1. 2 Methodology ........................................................................................ 1
1. 3 Qualifications of Preparers................................................................... 2
2. REGULATORY FRAMEWORK............................................................ 3
2. 1 National Register of Historic Places...................................................... 3
2. 2 California Register of Historical Resources........................................... 4
2. 3 Redondo Beach Historic Preservation Ordinance .................................. 6
3. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING............................................................. 7
3. 1 Description and History of the Property ............................................... 7
4. HISTORIC CONTEXTS.................................................................... 11
4. 1 Brief History of Redondo Beach......................................................... 11
4. 2 Residential Development of North Redondo ........................................ 12
4. 3 The Arts & Crafts Movement ................................................... :.......... 13
5. EVALUATION OF ELIGIBILITY........................................................ 16
5. 1 National Register of Historic Places .................................................... 16
5. 2 California Register of Historical Resources ......................................... 20
5. 3 Redondo Beach Historic Preservation Ordinance ................................ 21
5. 4 Integrity ............................................................................................ 22
6. CONCLUSIONS............................................................................... 24
7. REFERENCES................................................................................ 25 Appendix A - Resumes
Appendix B - DPR Forms
Historical Resource Evaluatlon Report - 2501 Curtis Avenue, Redondo Beach Table of Contents G A
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This report presents the results of a historical resource evaluation of the property located at 2501 Curtis Avenue in the City of Redondo Beach (City(. The property is located on the southwest corner of Phelan Lane and Curtis Avenue. It consists of one legal parcel which corresponds with Assessor' s Parcel Number ( APN) 4153- 015-010. The property is improved with a one -and -half -story singlefamily residence constructed in 1933.
GPA Consulting ( GPA( was retained to complete this evaluation to determine whether the property is a historical resource as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act ( CEQA(.
The property is not currently designated under any national, state or local landmark or historic district programs: however, it was identified in the 1996 City of Redondo Beach Historc Resources Survey as an unaltered Craftsman style building and given a " B" - rating: identified as individually eligible for local landmark designation.
After careful inspection, investigation, and evaluation, GPA concluded that, in our professional opinion, the property would not be eligible for listing In the National Register of Historic Places National Register) and California Register of Historical Resources ( California Register, or eligible for designation as a Redondo Beach Landmark due to a lack of significance and physical integrity. The recommended status code is 6Z, ineligible for national, state, and local designation through survey evaluation. Therefore, it is our professional opinion that the building on the property is not a historical resource as defined by CEQA.
Historical Resource Evaluation Report - 2501 Curtis Avenue, Redondo Beach Executive Summary G A
1. 1 Purpose
The purpose of this report is too nalyzewhether the subject property in the City of Redondo Beach is considered to be a historical resource as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act CEQA(. The property at 2501 Curtis Avenue is located on the corner of Curtis Avenue and Phelan Lane in the North Redondo neighborhood of the City of Redondo Beach ( see Figure 1). It encompasses one legal parcel associated with Los Angeles County Assessor Parcel Number (APNJ 4153-015-010 and features a one -and -a -half story, single-family residence constructed in 1933.
1. 2 Methodology
In preparing this report, GPA performed the following tasks:
ConsUted the Built Environment Resources Directory ( BERD) to determine whether or not the property is currently listed as a landmark or part of a historic district under national or state programs and whether or not the property has been previously identified or evaluated as a historical resource. The BERD, maintained by the State Office of Historic Preservation, includes information on cultural and historical resources reviewed for eligibility to the National Register of Historic Places and the California Historical Landmarks programs through federal and state environmental compliance laws, and resources nominated under federal and state registration programs. It replaces the California Historic Resources Inventory System ( CHRIS). While the BERD may not include all mapped data on historical or cultural resources filed with the South Central Coastal Information Center SCCIC), it includes information on previously evaluated properties. The review of the BERD revealed no prior evaluations of the property.
Historical Resource Evaluation Report- 2501 Curtis Avenue, Redondo Beach r'a ,:., A
2. Consulted the findings of the 1986 and 1996 citywide historic resources surveys of Redondo Beach to determine if the building was identified as a potential historical resource.
Structures on the Historic Resources Survey are classified into four categories of historical significance:
A"- buildings which are obvious examples of historically significant or notable structures indicated by distinctive architectural characteristics or age; " B"- buildings which are somewhat less unusual or distinctive in terms of age or architecture; however these are well designed buildings which research may prove to have a relationship to important events or persons in history; " C"- buildings which reveal much of their original architectural style knot substantially altered) and are fairly modest in architectural style and are less likely to have historical significance. Most of these buildings are good candidates as contributing structures in historic district; " D"- buildings which are clearly not significant In terms of architectural style or have been substantially altered from the original style.'
This research revealed that the property was given a " B"- rating and identified as individually eligible for local landmark designation as an example of an unaltered Craftsman style building ) see Appendix B).
3. Conducted an intensive field inspection of the Property on December 29, 2021, during which GPA assessed the general condition and physical integrity of the building on the property. Digital photographs of the exterior of the building were taken during the field inspection.
4. Conducted research into the history of the property. Sources referenced included building permit records, city directories, historic aerial photographs, prior survey data, newspaper archives, and the Redondo Reflex newspaper archives, available through the City Redondo Beach website.
5. Consulted the City of Redondo Beach Historic Context Statement to identify the appropriate contexts and themes under which to evaluate the property.
6. Reviewed and analyzed ordinances, statutes, regulations, bulletins, and technical materials relating to national, state, and local historic preservation designations, and assessment processes and programs to evaluate the significance and integrity of the building as a potential historical resource.
1. 3 Qualifications of Preparers
Emma Haggerty and Audrey von Ahrens, Associate Architectural Historians at GPA Consulting, were responsible for the preparation of this report and fulfill the qualifications for a historic preservation professional outlined in Title 36 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Port 61. Their resumes are included in Appendix A.
Historical Resource Evaluation Report - 2501 Curtis Avenue, Redondo Beach n
2. REGULATORY FRAMEWORK
Generally, a lead agency must consider a property a historical resource under CEQA if it is eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources ( California Register). The California Register is modeled after the National Register of Historic Places ( National Register). Furthermore, a property is presumed to be historically significant if it is listed in a local register of historical resources or has been identified as historically significant in a historic resources survey ( provided certain statutory criteria and requirements are satisfied) unless a preponderance of evidence demonstrates that the property is not historically or culturally significant? A lead agency may also treat a resource as historic if it meets statutory requirements and substantial evidence supports the conclusion. The National Register, California Register, and City of Redondo Beach local designation programs are discussed below.
2. 1 National Register of Historic Places
The National Register is ' an authoritative guide to be used by federal, state, and local governments, private groups, and citizens to identify the nation's cultural resources and to indicate what properties should be considered for protection from destruction or impairment.' s Criteria
To be eligible for fisting in the National Register, a property must be at least 50 years of age (unless the property is of " exceptional importance") and possess significance in American history and culture, architecture, or archaeology. A property of potential significance must meet ane or more of the following four established criteria:°
A. Associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history; or
B. Associated with the lives of persons significant in our past; or C. Embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction or that represent the work of a master, or that possess high artistic values, or that represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction; or D. Yield, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history.
Context
To be eligible for listing in the National Register, a property must be significant within a historic context. " National Register Bulletin 15" states that the significance of a historic property can be judged only when if is evaluated within its historic context. Historic contexts are "those patterns, themes, or trends in history by which a specific._ property or site is understood and its meaning... is r a
r ,
I" I1 , . k
Historical Resource Evaluation Report - 2501 Curtis Avenue, Redondo Beach C '' A
made clear." s A property must represent an important aspect of the area' s history or prehistory and possess the requisite integrity to qualify for the National Register.
Integrity
In addition to possessing significance within a historic context, to be eligible for listing in the National Register a property must have integrity. Integrity is defined in " National Register Bulletin 15" as "the ability of a property to convey its significance." 6 Within the concept of integrity, the National Register recognizes the following seven aspects or qualities that in various combinations define integrity: feeling, association, workmanship, location, design, setting, and materials.
Integrity is based on significance: why, where, and when a property is important. Thus, the significance of the property must be fully established before the integrity is analyzed.
2. 2 California Register of Historical Resources
In 1992, Governor -Wilson signed Assembly BIII 2881 into law establishing the California Register. The California Register is an authoritative guide used by state and local agencies, private groups, and citizens to identify historical resources and to indicate what properties are to be protected, to the extent prudent and feasible, from substantial adverse impacts.' The California Register consists of properties that are listed automatically as well as those that must be nominated through an application and public hearing process. The California Register automatically includes the following:
California properties listed in the National Register and those formally Determined Eligible for the National Register;
State Historical Landmarks from No. 0770 onward; and
Those California Points of Historical Interest that have been evaluated by the State Office of Historic Preservation ( SOHP) and have been recommended to the State Historical Resources Commission for inclusion on the California Register." Criteria and Integrity
For those properties not automatically listed, the criteria for eligibility of listing in the California Register are based upon National Register criteria, but are identified as 1- 4 instead of A -D. To be eligible for listing in the California Register, a property generally must be at least 50 years of age and must possess significance at the local, state, or national level, under one or more of the following four criteria:
1. ! t is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns a' local or regional history, or the cultural heritage of California or the United States; or
2. It is associated with the lives of persons Important to local, California, or national history; or Historical Resource Evaluation Report- 2501 Curtis Avenue, Redondo Beach G A
3. It embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction or represents the work of a master, or possesses high artistic values; or
4. It has yielded, or has the potential to yield, information important In the prehistory or history of the local area, California, or the nation.
Properties eligible for listing in the California Register may include buildings, sites, structures, objects, and historic districts. If is possible that properties may not retain sufficient integrity to meet the criteria for listing in the National Register, but they may still be eligible for listing in the California Register An altered property may still have sufficient integrity for the California Register if it maintains the potential to yield significant scientific or historical information or specific data. I A property less than 50 years of age may be eligible if it can be demonstrated that sufficient time has passed to understand its historical importance. 10
The California Register may also include properties Identified during historic resource surveys.
However, the survey must meet all of the following criteria:''
1. The survey hos been or will be included in the State Historic Resources Inventory;
2. The survey and the survey documentation were prepared in accordance with office SOHP] procedures and requirements;
3. The resource is evaluated and determined by the office jSOHP] to have a significance rating of Category 1 to 5 on a DER Form 523; and
4. If the survey is five or more years old at the time of Its nomination for inclusion in the California Register, the survey is updated to identify historical resources that have become eligible or ineligible due to changed circumstances or further documentation and those that have been demolished or altered in a manner that substantially diminishes the significance of the resource.
SOHP Survey Methodology
The evaruatlon instructions and classification system prescribed by the SOHP in its Instructions for Recording Historical Resources provide a Status Code for use in classifying potential historical resources. In 2003, the Status Codes were revised to address the California Register, These Status Codes are used statewide in the preparation of historical resource surveys and evaluation reports.
The first code is a number that indicates the general category of evaluation. The second code is a letter that indicates whether the property is separately eligible ( S), eligible as part of o district D), or both ( B). There is sometimes a third code that describes some of the circumstances or conditions of the evaluation. The general evaluation categories are as follows:
1. Listed in the National Register or the California Register,
2. Determined eligible for listing in the National Register or the California Register. alt.; c.
I. n al of a. I, Y' l - 1 r
Historical Resource Evaluation Report - 2501 Curtis Avenue, Redondo Beach G A
3. Appears eligible for listing in the National Register or the California Register through survey evaluation.
4. Appears eligible for listing in the National Register or the California Register through other evaluation.
5. Recognized as historically significant by local government.
6. Not eligible for listing or designation as specified.
7. Not evaluated or needs re- evaluation.
The specific Status Code referred to in this report is as follows:
6Z Found ineligible for National Register, California Register, or local designation through survey evaluation.
2.3 Redondo Beach Historic Preservation Ordinanceia
The City of Redondo Beach adopted its Historic Preservation Ordinance in 1989. The Ordinance Title 10, Redondo Beach Municipal Code § 2. Ord. 2554) outlines the purpose and intent of the City' s Preservation Program, the responsibilities and qualifications of the Preservation Commission, and criteria and procedures for designation of landmarks and districts. Local landmarks are individual buildings or districts that are at least fifty (50) years of age' s and must reflect a special element of the city' s history, be identified with special persons or events, represent the work of a noted architect or builder, embody a unique architectural character, or represent established and familiar landmarks within the community.
A property must meet one or more of five criteria for designation established in Chapter 4, Article 2, Section 10- 4. 201 of the City of Redondo Beach Municipal Code. The five criteria are as follows:
a) It exemplifies or reflects special elements of the City' s cultural, social, economic, political, aesthetic, engineering, or architectural history; or
b) It is identified with persons or events significant in local, state or national history; or c) It embodies distinctive characteristics of a style, type, period, or method of construction, or is a valuable example of the use of indigenous materials or craftsmanship; or d) It is representative of the notable work of a builder, designer, or architect; or e) Its unique location or singular physical charocieristic( s) represents an established and familiar visual feature or landmark of a neighborhood, community, or the City. 14 t c ', t e rs 1
v:
r i
Historical Resource Evaluation Report- 2501 Curtis Avenue, Redondo Beach A
3. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
2501 Curtis Avenue is in the North Redondo neighborhood of the City of Redondo Beach, located northeast of the intersection of Curtis Avenue and Phelan Lane ( see Figure 2). These streets are two-lane residential streets with two-way traffic traveling north -south. The surrounding parcels are developed single- and multi -family residential buildings constructed between the 1930s and 2020s.
Immediately east of the property is publicly owned land occupied by a steel transmission fewer, part of the La Fresa Transmission Line, and the North Redondo Beach bike path ( see Figure 3).
3. 1 Description and History of the Property
2501 Curtis Avenue comprises a rectangular -shaped parcel on a corner lot. The property is improved with a single-family residence. The residence is situated near the central of the parcel and is oriented to the south, overlooking Curtis Avenue (see Figure 4). Surrounding the residence are front, rear, and side yards, each similar in size. The rear ( north) yard is improved with a scored concrete driveway that runs east -west In length and is accessed from Phelan Lane ( see Figure 5).
Pedestrian access is from Curtis Avenue via a narrow, concrete walkway in the front ( south) yard.
A metal chain-link fence surrounds the perimeter of the property. oip , 1e, Jel ; 1. "
11, lP„
Historical Resource Evaluation Report- 2501 Curtis Avenue, Redondo Beach G A
Architectural Description
The single-family residence is one -and -half -stories in height and rectangular In plan. It has a front - gabled roof with shed roof extension on the northeast dormers on the east and west roof planes.
The roof is clad in composition shingles and has open, overhanging eaves with exposed wood rafter tails and simple wood borgeboards, The exterior is clad in a combination of wood shingles, board-cnd-batten, and stone veneer. Fenestration on the south and west elevations is symmetrically arranged and evenly spaced while fenestration on the while the north and east elevations is asymmetrically arranged.
The south ( primary) elevation faces Curtis
Avenue ( see Figure 6(. The first story is clad in
applied stone veneer and the upper story
within the gable has wood shingles. The stone
veneer on consists of a combination of arroyo
stones, fieldstone and various other larger
stone types applied in no apparent pattern.
The main entrance is centered on the
elevation. A battened wood door and metal
security screen are accessed by four stone
and concrete steps with metal pipe railing.
The entrance is flanked by large vinyl
windows with simulated divided lights. Simple
wood brackets are located at each end of
the elevation beneath the roof eaves.
The west elevation faces Phelan Lane and is
clad in stone veneer with visible differences in
the type, shape, size, and color stone, similar
to that of the south elevation ( see Figure 7).
Six recessed window openings are evenly
spaced across the elevation, each with
single -light wood casement sash with eight -
light transoms behind aluminum screens.
Centered on the west roof plane above is a
shed dormer clad in board -and -batten siding
with a tripartite window with wood, single -
light casement sash.
Historical Resource Evaluation Report - 2501 Curtis Avenue, Redondo Beach 1"
G A
The north elevation overlooks the rear driveway
and is primarily clad in wood shingles with a small
portion on the west clad in stone veneer ( see
Figure B). The stone veneer consists of arroyo
stones and fieldstones applied in an irregular
pattern. A rear entrance Is located on the onestory, shed roof addition at the east end of the elevation. The wood paneled door is partially
glazed with a one -over -one metal window. West
of the entrance on the original portion of the
residence, the elevation consists of evenly
spaced window openings of various sizes and
window types. There are three windows on the ground floor including (from east to west): a wood picture window with single -light, a metal sliding sash window with single lights, and a wood single - light casement sash with eight -light transom. On the upper story is a tripartite window beneath the gable peak with center fixed single -light and single -light side casements. Each of the windows on this elevation have a simple wood surround.
The east elevation overlooks the rear yard and
is asymmetrically arranged ( see Figure 9). If is
predominately clad in stone veneer like that of
the south and west elevations. Near the center
of the elevation Is an entrance opening with
paired, multi -light, wood French doors. An
exterior chimney is located on the south end of
the elevation, clad in stone. The chimney stack
tapers above the roofline and has a rounded
arch cap made of stone. Flanking the chimney
are recessed window openings. The
southernmost window is a single -light casement
with eight -light transom. The northernmost
consists of a jalousie window with eight -light transom obscured behind metal security bars. On the north end of the elevation is the one-story projection volume of an enclosed porch addition with shed roof. It is clad in wood shingles and has a grouping of wood windows with single -light casement sash. Above the ground floor, the east roof plane has a shed dormer the some as that of the west elevation.
Construction History
The property was first developed in 1933 by owner Claude C. Campbell, who constructed the existing single-family residence with a detached garage( demolished). No building permit records were available from the City of Redondo Beach. However, visual observations made during the site visit conducted by GPA in December 2021 provide evidence of alterations that have occurred since initial construction, listed below. Due to the lack of building permit records, the exact dates of these alterations are unknown. Estimate dates based on photographic and/ or physical evidence are provided when possible.
Historical Resource Evaluation Report - 2501 Curtis Avenue, Redonda Beach Application of stone veneer cladding to all exterior elevations, covering the original wood shingle by 1945. 15
Demolition of original detached garage in north yard between 1960 and 1969. 16 Addition of a metal security door on the main entrance prior to 2012.
Replacement of two original windows on the primary ( south) elevation with incompatible, simulated divided light vinyl windows within original openings, c. 2014- 2017.
Modification of concrete steps at primary entrance with addition of stone and a metal pipe handrail at an unknown date.
Replacement of all original multi -light windows on the north, east and west elevations with single -light windows and one jalousie window at an unknown date.
Original window replaced with single -light square window in easternmost corner of first floor, north elevation at an unknown date.
Addition of one-story volume with shed roof or enclosure of a porch on the north end of the east elevation at an unknown date.
Addition of aluminum framed screens on most window openings at unknown dates.
Replacement of original roof shingles with Incompatible composition shingle roof at an unknown date.
Addition of chain-link metal fence around perimeter of property at an unknown date
Alteration of roof coves with plywood soffit at north and east elevations at an unknown date.
Ownership and Tenant History
The original owner was Claude C. Campbell, who resided at the property with his wife, Mae Campbell, from 1933 until 1942. 17 Claude worked as a machinist for the Southern Pacific Railrood. le Moe was a pastor and was ordained as a minister in 1937, after which she utilized the property as a meeting space for the Temple of the Holy Cross until the Campbell' s sold the property in 1942. 19 The second owners, Martin O. Landers and Lucille I. Landers, resided at the property from 1942 until at least 1960. p They both worked for Northrop, an aerospace and defense technology company based out of Redondo Beach. 21 Martin was a machinist and Lucille was an engineerP' No information regarding the names of the property owners between 1960 and 1971 was found.
In 1971, Gloria Spence purchased the property and resided there until 2021. 23 Historical Resource Evaluation Report- 2501 Curtis Avenue, Redondo Beach 10 A
4. HISTORIC CONTEXTS
The significance of a property must be evaluated within its historic context (s). Historic contexts are those ponerns or trends in history by which a specific property is understood. The most applicable contexts for evaluating the property at 2501 Curtis Avenue are the history of Redondo Beach and early residential development In North Redondo. Because previous surveys of the property identified the building as significant within the Craftsman style and as a stone building, the following contexts are included for clarification: the Arts & Crafts Movement including the Craftsman style and Craftsman bungalows, as well as Arroyo stone buildings.
4. 1 Brief History of Redondo Beach24
Redondo Beach lies on the western edge of the Peninsular Mountain Range which runs northwest and southeast along the coast of Southern California. It is approximately 17 miles from the City of Los Angeles, situated on the southern end of modem Santa Monica Bay. The incorporated city rests on portions of three historic ranchos: San Pedro, Los Palos Verdes, and Sousal Redondo. Several distinct sections make up the modern city of 6. 35 square miles, The original city was established in 1887. The area of this original site covered 1, 214. 08 acres or approximately 2 square miles. A second section to the northeast, the Redondo Villa Tracts [ of which 2501 Curtis Avenue is apart), was first subdivided in 1906 and became part of the city in 1927. This annexation brought an additional 2, 252.6 acres ( approximately 4 square miles) of rural territory to the original townsife and created a city structure reminiscent of two rectangles set side- by-side, one set slightly above the other, which overlap of one corner. Today, the area included in the 1927 annexation is generally referred to as " North Redondo:' Clifton -by -the -Sea, adjoining the original city on the south, began in 1906. A portion of it annexed to the city in 1913, and other tracts within the area have annexed at different times since then. The final section, Hollywood Riviera, lies south of Clifton -by -the -Sea and is divided between Redondo Beach and Torrance. These latter areas, although originally distinct, today blend into the resort and residential ambiance of the original city. The original community of about 1, 214 acres was planned in 1887 on a natural amphitheater above the beach. Because of the limited acreage, the land was devoted to residential resort living and wharf related industry. Only a few yards out io sea, the amphitheater continues into a deep -water canyon. Early promoters of the town pointed to the flat surface of the water and commented that oil deposits seeping up from the canyon helped to keep the water calm.
Experience, however, has shown otherwise. The bay, while partially sheltered, is subject to severe storm action. The storms, and the first breakwater designed to protect the beach front changed the configuration of the shoreline even before construction of the present Southern California Edison plant in 1946 and King Harbor marina in the 1960s. In recent decades, Redondo Beach has undergone many changes, especially along the waterfront where the marina, King Harbor, has replaced most of the early industrial area and the associated small dwellings. 1) 1 A') Z, rr[
Historical Resource Evaluation Report- 2501 Curtis Avenue, Redondo Beach G A
Modem condominium developments, which now stand in place of the original downtown business district, have further altered the character of the area. Only one pre -1945 wharf, the Monstod Pier, remains to recall an earlier stage in the City's development. The northern section of the community, composed of approximately 3, 000 acres and first known as the Redondo Villa Tracts, is entirely different_ Here the land Is gently rolling and dry. The soil, however, is productive.
Over the years, many small farms and dairy -type operations prospered here. During the late 1920s, oil was discovered in this section, as well as in nearby Torrance, forming the Redondo -Torrance oil field. North Redondo, which was originally subdivided as an agricultural area in 1906 and later experienced further subdivision during the Depression and post-war era, Is today defined by its dense population and a broad range of architectural styles. Because of the salt lake, transportation linkages between Redondo, San Pedro and Los Angeles formed very early. When the Santa Fe railroad entered the basin, it made Redonda Beach a terminus for shipping. Two electric railways followed, which served the tourists who flocked to the pleasant beach in good weather. Evidence of these early railway lines remains today and can be seen in street curvature, the location of major intersections and the location of the City' s principal commercial centers.
4.2 Residential Development of North Redondoi
Expansion of Commercial and Residential Development
One year after its failed attempt to annex to the city of Hermosa Beach, the Villa Tract Chamber of Commerce joined forces with several leading organizations in Redondo Beach and organized yet another annexation drive, Behind this new effort lay the threat of a million -dollar street paving program proposed by Los Angeles interests who owned 37 per cent of the area' s property. Chamber representatives argued that the proposed program was a blatant attempt to recoup lost profits from unproductive oil land, rather than a genuine attempt to modernize the community. This argument succeeded, and on September 20, 1927, voters approved the annexation of the Redondo Villa Tracts to the City of Redondo Beach by a slim margin of thirteen votes.
More than 90% of the eligible voters cast their ballots, At the time of its annexation, the north Redondo area served as home for more than two thousand residents. "it is by far the greatest thing that has ever happened to this city," declared Henry Froude, president of the Redondo Beach Chamber of Commerce. Not all considered the annexation in such a positive light, however. In 1928, several Los Angeles commercial interests filed suit seeking a reversal of the annexation decision. These suits were followed by yet another in 1930. Finally in 1931, the last legal obstacle to the complete and definite annexation of the Villa Tract had been removed.
Historical Resource Evaluation Report - 2501 Curtis Avenue, Redondo Beach G A
Residential Development
Although the sub -division forces which were apparent during the early 1920s subsided somewhat during the Depression era, residential tract development continued in north Redondo. Most notable was the Shore Acres sub -division created by the Home Extension Association. Located near the junction of Mathews Avenue and Phelan Lane, this housing project attempted to strike a balance between the original rural identity associated with the Redondo Villa Tract and the more recent Identify of residential sub -division. Included as a part of this housing project plan was a cc -operative market site where residents of Shore Acres sold produce raised on their property. Each Saturday residents sold flowers, fresh vegetables, fruits, eggs chickens and even canaries to the surrounding communities from the community' s market house. A parking area adjacent to the market house was also provided by the Home Extension Association in an effort to attract customers from the surrounding communities of Torrance, Manhattan Beach, Inglewood and Hermosa Beach. 26
In 1937, the Redondo Beach City Council formally recognized the Increasing residential nature of north Redondo in its acceptance of a Planning Commission recommendation that the area known as Villa Tract No. 2 be rezoned from unlimited industrial to suburban usesY Since its subdivision as rural farmland in 1905, north Redondo had experienced several shifts in its economic identity. The first shift occurred in the early 1920s when the land originally subdivided by Carlson for rural development suddenly became popular for its oil producing potential.
The annexation of the area in 1927 and its identification as the city's future industrial site, resulted in yet another shift. Foil owing annexation, almost the entire eastern section of the original Villa Tracts was zoned for industrial purposes. The construction at the Golden State Fireworks Manufacturing Company on property adjacent to Villa Tract No. 2 in 1928 appeared to confirm this industrial trend.
By the early 1930s, however, dreams of unlimited oil production had faded and speculators who had purchased land during the oil boom were seeking opportunities to subdivide their property into residential sites. This move marked the third shift in the area' s economy and set Into motion a struggle between those seeking residential development and those who sought to perpetuate an industrial economy.
4. 3 The Arts 8s Crafts Movement
The City of Redondo Beach Historic Context Statement as well as the City' s 1986 and 1996 Historic Resources Surveys provide limited information on the Craftsman style, other than that the style was popular in Redondo Beach between 1900 and 1920. For a more in- depth analysis, the SurveyLA Citywide Historic Context Statement on the Craftsman style was applied. The most relevant portions were excerpted and adapted for the purposes of this report, below. acid.
Historical Resource Evaluation Report- 2501 Curtis Avenue, Redondo Beach 13 Craftsman Style' s
Craftsman architecture reflected the Arts and Crafts Movement' s [ from 1895 to 1930] conscious search for the supposed simplicity of a pre -industrial time when objects revealed the skill and craftsmanship of the laborer and, further, a rejection of the highly ornamented Victorian aesthetic. The Craftsman style applied to more than the building envelope; architects designed everything in harmony, from the furniture and fixtures to the landscape. The " ultimate bungalows" of the Craftsman style were usually two stories in height and custom designed by architects working closely with local artisans. Later [ in the 1900s through the 1920s], the aesthetics of the Craftsman style would be adapted to single -story, mass- produced bungalows grouped in neighborhoods for the middle class.
Craffsman Bungalow529
Although the term " bungalow" has been closely associated with the Arts and Crafts movement and the Craftsman style of architecture, it refers to a type of house rather than a style of architecture. As Craftsman style architecture reached the masses in the form of small homes described in catalogues as bungalows, the term became inextricably linked with the style.
The bungalow appeared in California during the first decade of the twentieth century. If was a house type ready made for the mild climate and profound demand brought about by the rapidly expanding population. While some bungalows were custom- designed by architects, most were selected from plan books or catalogues and were constructed by contractors or assembled from prefabricated pieces. The average price was $3, 000.
The Craftsman bungalow dates from the early 1900s through the 1920s. The bungalow' s simplicity of form, informal character, direct response to site, and extensive use of natural materials - particularly wood - was a regional interpretation of the socio-economic and aesthetic reforms espoused by the Arts and Crafts Movement' s founder, William Morris. Craftsman bungalows generally have rectangular or complex plans and are one to one -and -a -half stories tall. They have wood clapboard or shingle exteriors and are defined by their horizontality with broad front porches, often composed with stone, clinker brick, or stuccoed porch piers. Other character -defining features include low-pitched front -facing gabled roofs, and overhanging eaves with exposed rafter tails.
The City of Redondo Beach Historic Context Statement nor the City' s 1986 or 1996 Historic Resources Surveys provide information on stone buildings. For a more in- depth analysis, the SurveyLA Citywide Historic Context Statement on Arroyo stone buildings style was applied. The most relevant portions were excerpted and adapted for the purposes of this report, below.
Historical Resource Evaluation Repon- 2501 Curtis Avenue, Redondo Beach CA,
cr, nrI'
Historical Resource Evaluation Repon- 2501 Curtis Avenue, Redondo Beach G A
Arroyo Stone Buildings, 1892- 1930^
The Arroyo stone building type is distinguished by elevations clad entirely in arroyo stone. Small groups of arroyo stone buildings can be found in the foothill neighborhoods of Northeast Los Angeles, near the Arroyo Seco, and SunlandTujunga in the Crescenta Valley, where arroyo stones ( also known as river rocks) could be collected from washes and streams. In most cases, Arroyo stone buildings were constructed by skilled stonemasons or artistic types who were building for themselves or others without the assistance of an architect. Charles Lummis, a c'nampion of Arroyo Culture and the Arts and Crafts Movement, constructed his own home, EI Alisal, from stones he collected from the Arroyo Seco in 1898. The stone elements of EI Alisal exemplify the Arts and Crafts ideal of using native materials to create handcrafted buildings. A small number of individuals continued the tradition of using locally sourced Arroyo stones for cladding an entire building as opposed to using the stone as on accent material on chimneys, walls, and foundations as is commonly found in Craftsman style buildings). The buildings they created often took a long period of time to construct and their design inspiration frequently came from the architectural styles of the Arts and Crafts movement as well as the forms and shapes of the Mission Revival style, featuring raised parapets, bell towers, and irregular, rambling plans enclosing courtyards and patios.
Character defining/ associative features of Arroyo stone buildings include One or two stories in height
Elevations clad fully with Arroyo stone
Hipped or gabled roofs with overhanging eaves
Small, recessed window openings
Historical Resource Evaluation Report - 2501 Curtis Avenue, Redondo Beach 15 G A
S. EVALUATION OF ELIGIBILITY
The property at 2501 Curtis Avenue was evaluated for listing in the National Register, the California Register, as well as for designation as City of Redondo Beach Landmark using established criteria and aspects of integrity.
5. 1 National Register of Historic Places
Criterion A
To be eligible for listing in the National Register under Criterion A. a property must have a direct association with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history.
The property is in the Villa Tract 2 of the North Redondo neighborhood. The tract was originally subdivided between 1905 and the early 1920s, however it remained largely undeveloped ( see Figure 10 and Figure 11'. 31 The surrounding parcels were sold for residential development between the 1920s through the 1930s and was a densely populated residential area by the 1960s see Figure 12 and Figure 13).
is . Pr •, < ui;, _; i_,-.
Historical Resource Evaluation Report - 2501 Curtis Avenue, Redondo Beach 16 G A
The property at 2501 Curtis Avenue was initially developed in the 1930s during the period when the North Redondo neighborhood transitioned from primarily agriculture to residential neighborhoods as the land was subdivided. However, the property does not have an important association with the development of North Redondo as the area was already established as a developing residential community twenty-five years before the subject property was built.
Properties like 2604 Fisk Lane, constructed in the Craftsman style in 1905 in the North Redondo area better reflect the early development of the neighborhood. Parcels in Villa Tract and Villa Tract 2 were advertised for sale and this industrial and agricultural area quickly changed to a residential community. 32 " National Register Bulletin 15" states that mere association with a historic trend is not enough, in and or itself, to qualify under Criterion A: the property' s specific association must be considered important as well. 33 The North Redondo neighborhood was subdivided between 1905 and the 1920s, with residential farmsteads, businesses and tract developments being constructed before 2501 Curtis Street was built. The property alone does not display the broad pattern of residential development as this trend began prior to the property' s construction and continued until the 1960s when the community was a densely populated, residential neighborhood ( see Figure 13). -
Furthermore, the residence has been so substantially altered over the years such that it no longer conveys its appearance as originally constructed in the 19305 and thus would not be considered a good or representative example of early residential development in the area. A more detailed analysis of integrity is discussed later in this report.
Claude C. Campbell was the owner builder of 2501 Curtis Avenue. His construction of the property was not an early development trend, nor did the construction of the property cause a direct influence in the area. As an owner builder he did not have any influence over the development of the neighboring parcels within North Redondo Beach or the Villa Tract 2, the specific tract where the residence is located; rather individual owner -builders were just part of a continuing trend at this time.
From 1937 until 1942, the subject property was used as a meeting space for the Temple of the Holy Cross, with owner Mae Campbell as pastor. " National Register Bulletin 15" states that historic significance for a religious property cannot be established on the merits of a religious doctrine, but rather, for architectural or artistic values or for important historic or cultural forces that the property represenis. 34 Research did not provide evidence to suggest the Temple of the Holy Cross was a significant congregation to the early development of North Redondo Beach. There were already established churches throughout Redondo Beach and North Redondo Beach such as the Grant Church in North Redondo that was established in 1922 ( demolished). 15 Therefore, it was not one of the first. Additionally, this meeting space appears to be the only association with the Temple of the Holy Cross which did not have any additional advertisements in the local paper once the Campbells moved out of the property in 1942; thus it does not appear to have been particularly influential to the community. Between 1937 through 1942, no meetings or events important to religious history occurred at the subject property. Research into the history of the Historical Resource Evaluation Report- 2501 Curtis Avenue, Redondo Beach 17 G A
congregation did not provide any information that would indicate the church made significant contributions to the North Redondo community or City of Redondo Beach as a whole.
Therefore, it is CPA' s professional opinion that the property is not significant under National Register Criterion A.
Criterion e
To be eligible for listing in the National Register under Criterion B, a property must be associated with the lives of persons significant in our past.
The earliest residents of the property at 2501 Curtis Avenue were husband and wife, Claude C. and Mae Campbell. They resided at the property from 1933 to until 1942. Claude worked as a machinist for the Southern Pacific Railroad until 1936. 34 Mae was a pastor for the Temple of the Holy Cross and held meetings for the congregation at their residence between 1937 until 1942. 37 As stated in Nation Register Bulletin 15, " Properties eligible under Criterion B are those associated with a person' s productive life, reflecting the time period when he or she achieved significance.
In some instances, this may be the person' s home; In other cases, a person' s business, office, laboratory, or studio may best represent his or her contribution. Properties that pre- or post- date an individual's significant accomplishments are not eligible.38Additlonal research into the Campbell' s history throughout their time in the residence did not indicate they were significant individuals in Our past.
The second owners, Martin O. and Lucille L. Landers, purchased the property in 1942 and resided there until at least 1960 and both worked for Northrop, an aerospace and defense technology company based out of Redondo Beach. 39 Martin worked as a machinist and Lucille was an engineer.40 Research into both Martin and Lucille did not provide any evidence to suggest that either individual achieved prominence or made substantial contributions within their respective fields. Although it is noteworthy that Lucille worked as an engineer during a time when the profession was male dominated and her career was certainly a personal achievement, Lucille would not be considered an important individual in history on this fact alone. She was not the first female engineer in history, nor did she make any particularly significant contributions in her field such that she would rise to a level of significance.
Research did not reveal the names of individuals that resided at the property between 1960 and 1971. The most recent owner, Gloria Spence, resided at the property from 1971 until 2021. No additional information other than her name could be found. Research revealed no indication that she would be a considered significant individual in our past.
The property is not associated with the lives of any significant individuals in history and therefore is not eligible under Criterion B.
Criterion C
Historical Resource Evaluation Report- 2501 Curtis Avenue, Redondo Beach 18 icy ,
Historical Resource Evaluation Report- 2501 Curtis Avenue, Redondo Beach 18 G A
To be eligible for listing under Criterion C, a property must embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction, represent the work of a master, possess high artistic values, or represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction. This property was evaluated as an example of a bungalow type in the Craftsman style as well as an Arroyo stone building.
The residence at 2501 Curtis Avenue does not reflect a particular architectural style, nor does it embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction. The building is a simple vernacular bungalow that was constructed by an owner -builder. It was common for owner -builders to borrow elements from styles that were employed prior to its construction, or that were popular at the time. As such, the residence has elements that can be attributed to various styles but does not exemplify one particular style as a whoiistic design. For example, the one -and - a -half story massing, roof profile with open eaves and exposed rafter tails, wood shingle and board and batten cladding, as well as the wood casement windows with multi -light wood transoms are reminiscent of the Craftsman style. However, the building lacks some of the most important character defining features of the style, most notably a broad front porch, that would have been composed with stone, clinker brick, or stuccoed porch piers. Thus, while the residence may exhibit some characteristics of the Craftsman style, they would not be considered distinctive. " National Register Bulletin 15" states, " to be eligible, a property must clearly contain enough of those characteristics to be considered a true representative of a particular type, period, or method of construction." 41 Exhibiting some features of a style is not sufficient in and of itself to rise to a level of significance.
Furthermore, the building was constructed outside of the period of significance for the Craftsman style in Southern California, which is considered to be from the mid -1900s to] 930s. As explained in Section 4.3, above, the Craftsman style was widely employed throughout the 1900s to 191 Es when the style hit its peak but by World War I, the Craftsman style declined in popularity. Although Craftsman bungalows remained prolific during the 1920s, the Craftsman style was outpaced by Period Revival styles by 1930. For all of these reasons, the residence would not be considered a significant example of the Craftsman style as applied to bungalows; therefore, the property is not eligible for the National Register under this aspect of Criterion C.
Portions of the residence are clad in stone veneer with different types of stone, applied in irregular patterns varying from elevation to elevation. Stone buildings, most commonly referred to as Arroyo stone buildings due to the most abundant source of stone being the Arroyo Seco, were constructed throughout Southern California between 1895- 1930. In most cases, Arroyo stone buildings were constructed by skilled stonemasons or artistic types who were building for themselves or others without the assistance of an architect. A small number of individuals continued the tradition of using locally sourced Arroyo stones for cladding an entire building has opposed to using the stone as an accent material on chimneys, walls, and foundations as is commonly found in Craftsman style buildings). The buildings they created often took a long period of time to construct and their design inspiration frequently came from the architectural styles of the Arts and Crafts movement as well as the forms and shapes of the Mission Revival style, featuring raised parapets, bell towers, and irregular, rambling plans enclosing courtyards and patios. w
Historical Resource Evaluation Report- 2501 Curtis Avenue, Redondo Beach 19 A
The property is not an example of an Arroyo stone building since it was originally entirely clad in wooden shingles with stone applied after its construction. Additionally, the property was constructed outside the Arroyo stone building period of significance which lasted from 1895 until 1930. Arroyo stone buildings are typically one or two stories in height, have hipped or gabled roofs with overhanging eaves with elevations clod fully with Arroyo stone, and small, recessed window openings. While the residence has applied stone veneer on some exterior walls, it would not be considered on example of the type or style as it was not purpose- built or designed as a stone building. Rather, the stone was applied later as an alteration. Furthermore, it was built outside the period of significance for Arroyo stone buildings. As such, the residence is not an example of an Arroyo stone building.
Claude C. Campbell was the original owner -builder of the property. Claude worked as a machinist and was not associated with the construction of any other properties in Redondo Beach. National Register Bulletin 15 states, " A master is a figure of generally recognized greatness in a field, a known craftsman of consummate skill, or an anonymous craftsman whose work is distinguishable from others by its characteristic style and quality." The construction of this property would not elevate him to the master eligibility status. Additionally, even if Campbell was a master builder, the property is not a notable example of any architectural type or style and does not retain integrity to its original date of construction to portray its original design, materials, or workmanship.
The last aspect of Criterion C, representing a significant and distinguishable entity whose components lack individual distinction, refers to historic districts. The surrounding area does not possess a distinct sense of time and place due to the range of architectural styles and property types ranging from construction in the 1930s to present day and is not eligible to qualify as a historic district.
Therefore, the property would not be eligible under National Register Criterion C.
Criterion D
To be eligible for listing under Criterion D, a property' s physical material must have yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important to history or prehistory. - This criterion generally applies to archaeological resources but may apply to a built resource in instances where a resource may contain important information about such topics as construction techniques or human activity. In any case, the resource must be the principal source of information. This is unlikely to be true for the property a12501 Curtis Avenue. Therefore, it would not be eligible to be significant under National Register Criterion D.
Conclusion
There is no evidence that the property located at 2501 Curtis Avenue possesses historical or architectural significance. Therefore, it is not eligible for the National Register under any criteria.
5. 2 California Register of Historical Resources
The California Register criteria for eligibility mirror those of the National Register. Therefore, the property is ineligible for listing on the California Register for the same reasons outlined above.
Historical Resource Evaluation Report- 2501 Curtis Avenue, Redondo Beach 20 G A
5. 3 Redondo Beach Historic Preservation Ordinance
The property at 2501 Curtis Avenue was evaluated against the criteria for eligibility for listing in the City of Redondo Beach Historic Register.
Criterion (a)
Properties eligible for listing under Criterion ( a) must exemplify or reflect special elements of the City' s cultural, social, economic, political, aesthetic, engineering, or architectural history.
As explained in the evaluation under National Register Criterion A, above, research revealed no evidence to suggest that the property exemplifies or reflects special elements of the City' s cultural, social, economic, political, history. As explained in the evaluation under National Register Criterion C, above, research revealed no evidence to suggest that the property exemplifies or reflects special elements of the City' s aesthetic, engineering, or architectural history.
Therefore, the property would not be eligible for listing as a Landmark under Criterion ( 0).
Criterion (b)
Properties eligible for listing under Criterion ( b) are those that are identified with persons or events significant in local, state or national history.
As explained in the evaluation under National Register Criterion B, above, research revealed no evidence to suggest that the property is identified with any persons significant in local, state or national history. Additionally, as explained in the evaluation under National Register Criterion A, above, there is no evidence to suggest that the property is identified with any events significant In local, state or national history.
Therefore, the property would not be eligible for listing as a City Landmark under Criterion ( b(.
Criterion ( c)
Properties eligible for listing under Criterion ( c) embody distinctive characteristics of a style, type, period, or method of construction, or are a valuable example of the use of indigenous materials or craftsmanship.
The property located at 2501 Curtis Avenue is a vernacular bungalow with Craftsman influences that has undergone substantial exterior alterations Including changes to fenestration, cladding, and a later addition since its date of construction. The property is not a notable example of the bungalow type or the Craftsman style. While the residence has applied stone veneer on some exterior walls, if would not be considered an example of the type or style as it was not purposebuilt as a stone building. Rather, the stone was applied later as an alteration, Furthermore, it was built outside the period of significance for Arroyo stone buildings and lacks most of the character defining features of the type since the stone is a later modification placed over the original wood shingles.
Therefore, the property would not be eligible for listing as a City Landmark under Criterion ( c).
Historical Resource Evaluation Report- 2501 Curtis Avenue, Redondo Beach 21 G A
Criterion (d)
Properties eligible for listing under Criterion (d) are representative of the notable work of a builder, designer, or architect
Claude C. Campbell, owner and builder of the property located at 2501 Curtis Avenue is not a notable architect in the City of Redondo Beach. This is the only known building he constructed within the City and since its 1933 date of construction, has been modified to no longer reflect its design or materials.
Therefore, the property would not be eligible for listing as a City Landmark under Criterion ( d).
Criterion ( e)
Properties eligible for listing under Criterion ( e) have a unique location or singular physical characterisfic( s) that represents an established and familiar visual feature or landmark of a neighborhood, community, or the City
The property located at 2501 Curtis Avenue is located in the Villa Tract 2 area of the North Redondo neighborhood of Redondo Beach. The property is surrounded by single and multi -family residential properties ranging from one to two stories in height. The property does not retain physical characteristics that represent an established and familiar visual feature or landmark due to the cumulative modifications to fenestration, cladding, and a rear addition since its date of construction. The subject property is a modified single-family residence and although part of the North Redondo neighborhood, it is not an established and familiar visual feature of the neighborhood or City,
Therefore, the property would not be eligible for listing as a City Landmark under Criterion ( e).
Conclusion
There is no evidence that the property located at 2501 Curtis Avenue possesses historical or architectural significance, Therefore, it would not be eligible for listing under any Redondo Beach historic designation criteria.
5. 4 Integrity
To be eligible for listing in the National Register, properties must retain their physical integrity from the period in which they gained significance, In the case of architecturally significant properties, the period of significance is normally the date of construction. For historically significant properties, the period of significance is usually measured by the length of the associations.
Location: The place where the historic property was constructed or the place where the historic event occurred.
The property retains integrity of location. The building on the property has not been moved since it was constructed in 1933.
Design: The combination of elements that create the form, plan, space, structure, and style of the property.
Historical Resource [ valuation Report- 2501 Curtis Avenue, Redondo Beach 22 G ? A
The property does not retain integrity of design. Existing characteristics of the building, including its non -original fenestration and stone cladding, and rear addition have led to cumulative impacts that no longer allow the property to reflect its original design.
Setting: The physical environment of a historic property The integrity of setting has been diminished by cumulative alterations and new construction along Phelan Lane and Curtis Avenue. Visual observation indicate that the property' s Immediate setting has also been altered by the removal of a rear garage, post 1960 and the construction of steel transmission towers and a bike path on the east abutting parcel in the late 1940s. n2 Materials: The physical elements that were combined or deposited during a particular period of time and in a particular pattern or configuration to form a historic property.
The integrity of materials has been diminished through replacement windows and doors, and applied stone cladding which no longer allow the property to reflect a 1930s bungalow type or Craftsman style building.
Workmanship: The physical evidence or the crafts of a particular culture or people during any given period in history or prehistory.
The property does not retain integrity of workmanship due to cumulative modifications the property has undergone since its date of construction.
Feeling: A property' s expression of the aesthetic or historic sense of a particular period of time.
The property does not retain integrity of feeling since original cladding and fenestration from its date of construction have been removed and replaced with contemporary, incompatible replacements.
Association: The direct link between an important historic event or person and a historic property.
The integrity of association is not relevant, as the property is not associated with a historic event or individual.
Historical Resource Evaluation Report - 2501 Curtis Avenue, Redondo Beach 23 G A
6. CONCLUSIONS
GPA was retained to complete this evaluation to determine whether the property is a historical resource as defined by CEOA. The property at 2501 Curtis Avenue is not currently listed under national, state, or local landmark or historic district programs. The property was identified as a " B" - rated building in the City of Redondo Beach 1996 Historic Resources Survey, meaning it was identified as appearing eligible for individual listing as a City of Redondo Beach historical resource.
However, after careful inspection, research and evaluation, GPA concludes that the property is not eligible for listing in the National Register, California Register, or listing under the City of Redondo Beach' s local historic register. The recommended Status Code is 6Z, " Found ineligible for National Register, California Register or Local designation through survey evaluation." Historical Resource Evaluation Report- 2501 Curtis Avenue, Redondo Beach 24 G A
REFERENCES
California Code of Regulations. California Office of Administrative Law, State of California Government.
California State Office of Historic Preservation, Department of Parks & Recreation. " Technical Assistance Bulletin N8: User' s Guide to the California Historical Resource Status Codes & Historic Resources Inventory Directory." Accessed November 2019. http:// ohp.parks.co.gov/ pages/ 1069/ files/ tab8. pdf.
City of Redondo Beach Municipal Code, Title 10, Chapter 4, Article 2.
City Directories, Redondo Beach, Various Dates.
Code of Federal Regulations, Title 36: Parks, Forests, and Public Property. Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration, United States Government.
GPA Consulting, " Architecture and Engineering, Arts and Crafts Movement ( 1895- 1930, Housing the Masses ( 1880- 1980, Arts and Crafts Neighborhoods ( 1890- 1930)" Los Angeles Citywide Historic Context Statement. City of Los Angeles Office of Historic Resources, June 2016.
Historical Resources Management and Joseph J. Milkovich and Associates, City of Redondo Beach Historic Context Statement. Redondo Beach: City of Redondo Beach Community Development Department- Planning Division.
Landers, Lucille. South Idaho Press. September 28, 2005.
National Register Bulletin 15: How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation." National Park Service, Cultural Resources. Edited by Patrick Andrus and Rebecca Shrimpton.
Accessed August 2019. hops:// www.nps.gov/ nr/ publications/ bulletins/ nrbl5/.
National Register Bulletin 16: How to Complete the National Register Registration Form." National Park Service, Cultural Resources. Lucille McClelland, Carol D. Shull, James Charlatan, at al.
Accessed August 2019. haps:// www. nps. gov/ nr/ publications/ bulletins/ nrbl 60/.
Redondo Reflex. Various Dates.
Rosenfeld, David. "Power Lines along 190th Street in Redondo Beach Could Come down in as Few as Three Years." The Daily Breeze, September 4, 2019.
htfps:// www,dailybreeze. com/ 2019/ 09/ 04/ power lines-a long- 190th-street-in- redond obeac h- cou Id -c om e -d own -i n -as -few -a s - t hree-years/.
Snyder, Gloria. This is a substantial collection of newspaper clippings and documents regarding various aspects of the history of Redondo Beach. Various dates.
Thirtieth Street Architects, Inc. City of Redondo Beach Historic Context Statement. Redondo Beach, CA: City of Redondo Beach, 1986.
Historical Resource Evaluation Report- 2501 Curtis Avenue, Redondo Beach 25 G A
Appendix A - Resumes
Historical Resource Evaluation Report- 2501 Curtis Avenue, Redondo Beach Appendix A Educational Background:
G A
E, MA HAGGERTY
Emma Haggerty is an Associate Architectural His lonon of GPA and has been involved in the field of historic preservation since 2016.
Emma graduated from the University of Vermont with a Master of Science in Historic Preservation. She has since worked in the public sector In both New Jersey and California on a variety of projects.
Emma joined GPA in 2021 and her experience has included review of environmental compliance documents In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act INHPAj; design review for consistency with the Secretary of the Interior' s Standards ( SOISI; and municipal code compliance, Additionally, Emma has
experience reviewing Mills Act Applications, preparing Mills Act Contracts, and performing site inspections for properties under and interested in the Mills Act.
M.S., Historic Preservation, University of
Vermont, 2018
B. A., Planning and Public Policy, Rutgers
University, 2016
Professional Experience:
GPA Consulting, Associate Architectural
Historian, 2021 - Present
City of San Diego, Historical Resources
Senior Planner & Mills
Act Coordinator, 2018- 2021
New Jersey Historic Preservation Office,
Program Associate, 2018
Notional Trust for Historic Preservation -
Lyndhurst Monsion,
Historic Preservation Intern, 2017
Qualifications:
Meets the Secretary of the Interior' s
Professional Qualifications Standards for
history and architectural history pursuant
to the Code of Federal Regulations, 36
CFR Part 61, Appendix A.
National Preservation Institute, Section
106: An Introduction
Selected Projects
Mills Act Application Review, Mills Act Coordinator,
City of San Diego,
February 2020 -November 2021
Mills Act Research and Contract Preparation, Mills
Act Coordinator,
City of San Diego, February 2020 -November 2021
Mills Act Inspection and Contract Recordation, Mills
Act Coordinator,
City of San Diego, February 2020 -November 2021
Quieter Homes Program- Section 106 Compliance
Review, Planner, City of Son Diego,
January 2019 -January 2020
Preliminary Design Assistance for Historic District
Design Guideline Compliance,
Senior Planner, City of San Diego, December 2020 -
November 2021
CEQA Significance Report Evaluation, Planner, City
of San Diego,
July 2018- November 2021
Prepared and presented formal presentations for
over 50 different properties
of Historical Resources Board Meetings and City
Council, City of San Diego,
July 2018 -November 2021
Historical Resource Evaluation Report- 2501 Curtis Avenue, Redondo Beach Appendix A Educational Background:
G A
Audrey von Ahrens Is an Associate Architectural Historian at GPA.
She has been involved in the field of historic preservation since 2013.
Audrey graduated from the University of Pennsylvania with a Master of Science in Historic Preservation and City Planning where she focused on preservation planning and community economic development. She has since worked in private historic preservation consulting in California. Audrey joined GPA in 2017 and her experience has included the preparation of environmental compliance documents in accordance with the California
Environmental Quality Act and Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act; historic context statements; Secretary of the Interior' s Standards analysis: large- scale historic resources surveys; and evaluations of eligibility for a wide variety of projects and property types throughout Southern California. Audrey is also experienced in coordinating with property owners and local governments In the preparation and review of Mills Act Property Contract applications and the inspection and reporting of properties applying for or with existing contracts.
M.S., Historic Preservation, University of
Pennsylvania, 2016
Master of City Planning, University of
Pennsylvania, 2016
B. A., Architectural Studies and B. A., Urban
Studies University of Pittsburgh, 2013
Professional Experience:
GPA Consulting, Associate Architectural
Historian, 2017 -Present
Heritage Consulting, Inc., Intern, 2015- 2016
Tocony Community Development Corp.,
Intern, 2014
Pittsburgh History & Landmarks Foundation,
Intern, 2013
University of Pittsburgh, Teaching Assistant,
2012- 2013
Pittsburgh Planning Deportment, Intern, 2012
Pittsburgh Downtown Partnership, Intern, 2011
Qualifications:
Meets the Secretary of the Interior' s
Professional Qualification Standards for history
and architectural history pursuant to the
Code, of Federal Regulations, 36 CFR Part 61,
App--ndix A.
Professional Activities:
Downtown Los Angeles Neighborhood
Council, Planning and Land Use Committee,
2018 -present
Selected Projects
328 N. Oakhurst Drive, Beverly Hills, CEQA
Historical Resources Report, 2020
818 Grant Street, Santa Monica, Landmark
Application, 2020-2021
1360 Vine Street, City of Los Angeles, CEQA
Historical Resources Technical Report, 2020-2021
1475 E. EI Segundo Boulevard, EI Segundo, CEQA
Historical Resources Report, 2020
4080 Lafayette Place, Culver City, CEQA Historical
Resources Technical Report, 2020
Architecture & Engineering Context, Los Angeles
Citywide Historic Context Statement, 2019
Broadway Federal Midtown Branch, Los Angeles,
Character -Defining Features Analysis and CEQA
Historical Resource Report, 2018
CF Braun & Company Plant, Alhambra, CEQA
Historical Resource Report, 2018
Hooper Center, Webb Schools, Claremont,
Secretary of the Interior's Standards Compliance,
2018 Los Angeles Mills Act Program, Pre -contract
Services and Periodic Inspections, 2017- 2020
Laguna Beach Mills Act Program, Application
Reports, 2017- 2020
North Beach Historic District, San Clemente,
National Register Nomination, 2021
WM Keck Science Center, Scripps College,
Claremont, Secretary of the Interior's Standards
Compliance, 2018- 2020
West Covina Historic Resources Survey and
Context Statement Update, 2018- 2019
Historical Resource Evaluation Report - 2501 Curtis Avenue, Redondo Beach Appendix A G A
Appendix B - DPR Forms
Historical Resource Evaluation Report- 2501 Curtis Avenue, Redondo Beach Appendix B kIDLN et J.
R I61Yf Y94ill
3fp_' 1
G ;' A
af so.
3l
ldle' RahS' Zd[ .- —
WI 7..&
il. nemwoa L.enLal. er
In.Mki,n: G- t' ll!. iva[: --_. = tl lM1 pf UY5fir ll.N lWnl'iN. AL[ a.'.' Iq[ etlN 6lP es Yfg:,15': dj Pe. nsrriptim Iru rib= rrae.: x . a' a S- claxc: s n. ln '. 0." n.aa l ..: ni: im, alk u . ai: d, al -:v C. 1 kasa- xs. l ilMl 1cr t, hW.u- Ir rl tl 9 d d ] nl y LTJ d I,, d I 4i. - v. ui 6 r.vd, Lli J:' Ra' Cl ft., '." P ' [ P_
i: E.ilum '.x a : ita\' a - 1, 1,
a1r_ vM MLea:
g DO
1 I i Y:rF
e=: onh 5• ael. (=] fcnla c: iu
Pnn[tl kv... ia, SF'Liotix ae' sWress;
valatlla r"'? d
Or
W4 bvrbl:. X_ 4ti1V4jpi ..... _._—
AE M:- r-^sine- twnliss ae
Pal. Aµ_ t iitk-IF f': Ln:: dtr' mn YW n- - a' t.4 F' ax.;: Fv. ; G 5:^(! BL It CA, rf Mas. iJtx 4i+w'.u'LuL h nfa ally 17 --__
e: ta. L+: a TPP t : Yew t t' a -' iag, Stu t c) um[ Red L skq'.cs:
LLa-_ 1W DUAN t Y Icd _' CitA' t P.' fN 1di[ y8(n i Xrn rHR ¢- 1' Historical Resource Evaluation Report- 2501 Curtis Avenue, Redondo Beach Appendix B